On 5/17/10 6:15 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> Just to make sure, you're talking about this, right?:
>
> <!DOCTYPE html>
> <body>
> <span style="display: table-cell">a</span>
> <span style="float: left"></span>
> <span style="display: table-cell">b</span>
> </body>
>
> In this case, step 2 of fantasai's revised algorithm won't do anything
> special with the float
Sure; that's what matches UA behavior. But why aren't you out to
redefine that like you are other parts of the behavior? ;)
> (Also, it might be debatable whether or not 3.1 would actually respond
> to the float. Defining floats as "out-of-flow" is the problem here -
> as written, step 3.1 could be interpreted as wrapping all three
> <span>s in a table-row, even though the float is *still* not either a
> table-cell or wrapped in one. It could also be interpreted as saying
> to wrap the two table-cells in a table-row, but not the float, which
> doesn't make any sense in terms of the box tree.)
There are all sorts of things that make no sense in terms of the "box
tree" that CSS calls for (and Bert keeps insisting it's not a tree, note).
>> Yes, yes you do.... Either that or make it very clear what you actually
>> mean.
>
> Sure. Do you have a preference on which I should do? I can go either way.
Not terribly as long as it's well-defined. Note that I'm still not at
all convinced this change is even desirable, so I'm probably not the
best person to ask to refine its detailed wording; I don't actually care
enough so far.
-Boris